If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

The 'Passing' Attribute needs change

Been watching the Euros and couldn't help but notice how players like Pirlo and Xabi Alonso can play accurate long passes all game but are however weaker at passing than players like Xavi, Iniesta and Özil on FM. Now I'm not saying xavi isn't a great passer of the ball, but imo he doesn't attempt enough long range passes to be considered the best.

The OP here suggests having two attributes; "long passing & short passing", like there is for shooting (finishing & long shots).

I don't think this is necessary though. If 'passing' attribute was considered as passing range, the players abilities could still be represented accurately. Players who can consistently hit 60-70 yard passes accurately would have the highest rating (20). I would consider this to be players like Scholes, Pirlo and Xabi Alonso.

Now some will argue that Xavi has the best passing stats of active players but he could still produce this in game with a passing (range) attribute of 17-18 considering that he has the ppm "like to play short simple passes" and his excellent 'decisions' attribute. He would still be able to make successful killer balls with his high 'creativity'.

This would make the 'decisions' attribute more important. Players like Alonso and Gerrard who have a slight tendency to attempt long range risky passes when there were other options would not be able to achieve Xavi'esque stats due to their lower 'decisions' attributes (14-17) and ppms like "attempt long range passes" or "likes to switch ball to other flank".

I know a lot i my post can be considered opinion based but I feel the 'passing' attribute doesn't do, excellent long range passers, justice. Your thoughts please

Heartily agree. With modern floating systems we need passing split into short/long passing accuracy.
It would also be nice to see some way to include (or get the exact numbers for current stats to replicate) complete selfishness. People like Balotelli and C.Ronaldo who can be brilliant, but can also throw a massive hump and play selfishly, or not even bother at all. Work rate doesn't cover it, because they can work hard. Consistency doesn't either. Temperament doesn't Teamwork doesn't. Between them you could get close, but it's very hard to make a player a petulant diving moaner who gives up half the time, without ruining his ability to actually do mind-blowing things too. A selfish stat, along with a 'likely to be booked for talking back/taking off shirt'.

I am pretty sure the game allows for 4-6-0 formation. As for passing, IDK, seems like it could be handled within the current passing/crossing/creativity/decisions/technique framework. Or maybe a PPM like 'tries long range passes' similar to 'tries killer balls often'.

Yeah, on FM a Xavi would still be more effective for an Italian DLP position than Pirlo but he is not the type of player to consistently play 50-70 yard passes. He prefers to build up the game and player intricate passes when in the opposition half. The game needs a way of appreciating the best long range passers.

Isn't this already in place through the PPM's? Ie. someone like Pirlo has attempts 'long range passes' and Xavi has 'plays short simple passes', no?

I think the OP's issue is that while Pirlo will attempt many more long range passes than Xavi, the odd time Xavi does go for the hollywood ball it will be better and more consistant than what Pirlo is capable of doing, which would likely not be the case in real life.

I think the OP's issue is that while Pirlo will attempt many more long range passes than Xavi, the odd time Xavi does go for the hollywood ball it will be better and more consistant than what Pirlo is capable of doing, which would likely not be the case in real life.

Exactly my issue. I could give Xavi instructions to pass long and he'll be better than Pirlo at what Pirlo does better than anyone in real life.

What you are suggesting is that Pirlo has better Creativity, Technique and Anticipation than Xavi, which is a data issue.

Yes I know this. But I am not suggesting that Pirlo is more creative or has a higher anticipation than Xavi. Creativity is not just seeing long distant passes but also involves seeing short intricate passes through tight spaces or at narrow angles and I'll admit Xavi is as good as there is at this.

If the 'passing' attribute was change from being passing accuracy (as you said) to passing range (range at which a player can deliver passes accurately; affected by 'composure' and 'technique' among others) Xavi would still be accurately represented with a lower pass (range) attribute as he rarely tries long passes anyway. His composure and technique would allow him to be the best at delivering accurate passes within a shorter range, and his creativity would let him get his customary assists like he does in real life.

Yes I know this. But I am not suggesting that Pirlo is more creative or has a higher anticipation than Xavi. Creativity is not just seeing long distant passes but also involves seeing short intricate passes through tight spaces or at narrow angles and I'll admit Xavi is as good as there is at this.

If the 'passing' attribute was change from being passing accuracy (as you said) to passing range (range at which a player can deliver passes accurately; affected by 'composure' and 'technique' among others) Xavi would still be accurately represented with a lower pass (range) attribute as he rarely tries long passes anyway. His composure and technique would allow him to be the best at delivering accurate passes within a shorter range, and his creativity would let him get his customary assists like he does in real life.

Yes of course Composure could come into play more in those situations too. I think it is important to remember that the ME has poor ball physics, though. It may well be that if SI manages to complete the new ME by FM2013 these long pass issues could be solved simply by adjusting Xavi's and Pirlo's attributes - which as you describe is difficult now. The reason is that the ball's curve and velocity are very unrealistic on long passes; they are often harder than "shoots with power" shots and usually low and straight. Some of the most impressive passes this last month were Pirlo's curled and finely weighted 30-yarders, and those cannot happen in FM12.

We'll just have to wait and see what possibilities the new ME will bring when it comes to ball physics.

Firstly, I feel that the suggestion is not actually aimed at changing anything else than some players' attributes, which makes it look like a pure research suggestion.

Secondly, long passes are sooo 80ies... I remember that the best midfielders were all famous for their ability to split defenses with long range passes. This is not modern football however. The examples named are way beyond 30, Xabi Alonso left aside. And also they just do it three times a game, not all the time.

Thirdly, I'm not sure that the ability to make a long range pass necessarily deserves having a higher passing attribute. To me it looks like a personal tendency much more, just like it is reflected in the PPMs. Who says that Xavi cannot make great long range passes? It's a tendency for which he has the negating PPM and which does not command a punishment on the passing attribute. Who says that these are even the high art of passing? Quick short passes are actually incredibly difficult, try to have that on FM without world-class players. Long range passes need some vision and accuracy, but quick short passes are to me the fine art and much more relevant in the modern game.

Secondly, long passes are sooo 80ies... I remember that the best midfielders were all famous for their ability to split defenses with long range passes. This is not modern football however. The examples named are way beyond 30, Xabi Alonso left aside. And also they just do it three times a game, not all the time.

quick short passes are to me the fine art and much more relevant in the modern game.

That is not to say that he no longer had talent. A physically unremarkable player, his domain was sitting front of his own defence and spraying passes across the pitch for his more illustrious teammates – Michael Laudrup, Hristo Stoichkov and Romario being amongst the biggest names to have benefited from his presence. When Marcotti wrote the article, at 33, Guardiola should have been at his peak.

But the reality was that nobody wanted him. In the early 2000s, Europe was tactically obsessed with two types of players in the centre – tough-tackling defensive midfielders, and classic Number 10 creators. Most big sides followed this destroyer-creator model, like Davids-Zidane at Juventus. And therefore, for the deep-lying playmaker like Guardiola, there was nowhere to go."

I think the best way to do it would be to split it into long range and short range, rather than 1 stat for range. I think this because if someone was just as good at short passing as long passing, but really good at it, there would be no way to do this with just the 1 stat.

Still don't get what's wrong with having one attribute for the ability to pass and others of the existing coming in as well for either short or long passes.

The passing attribute only shows how good someone is at passing a ball.

The argument is that a player like Xavi who only really does short passing most of the time and is definately the best around at that, is also considered in the game to be the best at long passing as well, when this probably isn't the case, having watched Pirlo first hand at Euro 2012, I'd have to agree.

The passing attribute only shows how good someone is at passing a ball.

The argument is that a player like Xavi who only really does short passing most of the time and is definately the best around at that, is also considered in the game to be the best at long passing as well, when this probably isn't the case, having watched Pirlo first hand at Euro 2012, I'd have to agree.

But that doesn't command a change in the passing attribute. We have inter alia technique, decisions, creativity and PPMs which should also come into the equation. All I'm saying that all the means are there and for obvious reasons I do not know whether and how the ME uses them.

btw Xavi is actually very likely be extremely good at long passes as well irl, he just doesn't choose to make them very often.

But that doesn't command a change in the passing attribute. We have inter alia technique, decisions, creativity and PPMs which should also come into the equation. All I'm saying that all the means are there and for obvious reasons I do not know whether and how the ME uses them.

btw Xavi is actually very likely be extremely good at long passes as well irl, he just doesn't choose to make them very often.

You misunderstand what is being said though, you can't say Xavi is better than Pirlo at long passes due to the lack of long passes Xavi makes, but in FM he is better in both short and long passes. Also, long passing is a total different ball game to short passing, due to the fact that Xavi's ability to do his short passing is down to keeping a cool head and you don't need much else to be able to pass short to someone, but it's extremely effective. With long passing, you need the ability to determine where a player is going to be if he's running, whilst also having the accuracy in your long pass to pick out someone standing still, both of which require a lot more than short passing.

I wouldn't disagree with your statement that Xavi may be good at long passes, but I wouldn't go as far as to say hes very likely to be extremely good, because he doesn't make many long passes, so you have nothing to judge on.

While I don't disagree with Wege how many players can you think of who would have a greater then two point difference between long passing and short passing values?

You are right in the sense that most good long range passers are extremely likely to be good short range passers. I believe the ability to consistently complete short passing is more down to technique and composure as long as it is within the players technical range. Which is why I think changing the passing attribute to 'passing range' rather than 'passing accuracy' would allow all players, both excellent short passers and excellent long passers, to be accurately represented.

The argument of Xavi probably being as good in long passing as Pirlo is opinion based and I do not want to get into it. All i'll say is that most centre backs/goalkeepers are given lower 'finishing' despite the fact that they rarely have the opportunity to display their true quality.

I don't think some of you guys realize how difficult it is to make the accurate short through balls with the absolutely perfect weight, like Xavi and Iniesta did in the final to assist the first 2 goals.

I'd much rather be up for splitting short/long range passing attributes than make the likes of Xavi and Iniesta worst at passing than Xabi Alonso and Pirlo. Because Xavi is a 20 at short passes and it's not just because of the vision, decision-making, timing of it, all of which is extremely impressive, makes a huge difference and is already in the game as separate attributes. The accuracy and weight of the short pass as well is unbelievable. I do agree he's not as good spraying mid/long-range diagonal passes as Pirlo (who is phenomenal in that technical gesture), but...

I maybe wrong but (putting mental attributes aside) I have the impression that it's harder to make pin point long pass than short ones. Hence, when making long passes, more should be calculated, like technique, passing and crossing(similar to long pass). While making short passes, mainly passing and slightly technique. The technique part is for the swerve, speed and how well he can consistenly make a "perfect" strike on the ball.

Personally, and I'm speaking as a corporatw league player, I find that the longer the pass, the easier it gets.

I usually play as a back, and my favourite pass is a long one to one of the wingers. All I really need to do is get it in the general area, as the ball takes so long to get there that the winger has more than enough time to get to where the ball is headed. The shorter, faster ones, however, takes a lot more. They need to be made at the exact time, at the exact angle, with the exact amount of power. Much harder than chucking the ball in the air and hoping for the best...

Personally, and I'm speaking as a corporatw league player, I find that the longer the pass, the easier it gets.

I usually play as a back, and my favourite pass is a long one to one of the wingers. All I really need to do is get it in the general area, as the ball takes so long to get there that the winger has more than enough time to get to where the ball is headed. The shorter, faster ones, however, takes a lot more. They need to be made at the exact time, at the exact angle, with the exact amount of power. Much harder than chucking the ball in the air and hoping for the best...

I assure you that curling the ball between two defenders to a moving striker is nothing like chucking the ball into an area. Weighted straight passes are difficult, but weighted long passes are more difficult.

Is it just me or do players never attempt that many long range passes in the game anyway? Even if they have the PPMs "tries long range passes" and "likes to switch the ball to other flank", I rarely ever see them do it.

I've been trying to implement this into my tactic, as I have a deep lying playmaker with 19 for passing and he has these PPMs as well as "dictates tempo" and "comes deep to get the ball", I have set his passing to the first notch on "Direct", and I set my wingers and fullbacks to "hug touchline" and set quite a wide formation with the idea that when he receives the ball, he would have options on the wings to spread the play to, like you see in real life, but I've never seen him do it.

Recently I saw a screenshot of Joey Barton, and if I'm right, I saw he has 14 in passing. I don't him SO well but isn't just a problem of the range 1-20?
Or shall be put a short pass stat and a long pass stat (deleting cross)?

For the first time I heard a proposal that I can really warm up to. Why not remove crossing and put in long passing instead? Are they really that different? Are there good crossers that are bad passers or vice versa?

For the first time I heard a proposal that I can really warm up to. Why not remove crossing and put in long passing instead? Are they really that different? Are there good crossers that are bad passers or vice versa?

crossing is a different technique to long passing. Most crosses, you are using the inside of your foot with the aim of curling the ball. making a cross field pass, you're pinging the ball like a goalkeeper. long passing is a skill in itself, good long passers are able to determine the exact weight and speed the pass needs

crossing is a different technique to long passing. Most crosses, you are using the inside of your foot with the aim of curling the ball. making a cross field pass, you're pinging the ball like a goalkeeper. long passing is a skill in itself, good long passers are able to determine the exact weight and speed the pass needs

It's similar in many ways. If you long pass into the box, it's called crossing. A good cross needs the spin of the ball to curl the angle of the ball. That can apply to a long pass any where on the field. If you need to curl a long pass to make the pass possible, how is that different from "crossing"? Crossing is just a term to describe it.

This may sound radical, but at this point I would probably advocate melding crossing + long passing into one skill called long passing. And I would meld long shots and free kick into one skill called long shots. I understand what you're saying, j'accuse, about having to hit the ball while you're running. On the other hand, players have been known to make short passes either while standing still or running; yet we don't have two different skills in the game to differentiate a short pass depending on whether a player is standing still or running. And nor should we. So we shouldn't have long passing split into a bunch of different skills either. I do think that when the player is running, then the Technique skill, among other things, should come into play, but we don't need a skill for every little thing a player does. Here are some examples of stats based on my suggestion:

But do we need to say that Beckham is slightly better at free kicks than he is at long shots? Do we need to say he is slightly better at crossing than he is at long passing? Or is it more likely that all of these things can be explained with three fundamental attributes? Tactically, the difference between crossing and long passing is clear. But technically, there appears to be no difference between those two things. And the same goes for long shots and free kick taking.

For the first time I heard a proposal that I can really warm up to. Why not remove crossing and put in long passing instead? Are they really that different? Are there good crossers that are bad passers or vice versa?

Yes they are different skills one is hitting the ball with the inside of your foot the other usually uses the bridge of the foot. And there are plenty of wingers who developed a good cross through years of practice and repetition but weren't great passers Steve Guppy springs to mind.